Showing posts with label IIPM Best B School. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IIPM Best B School. Show all posts

Monday, October 08, 2012

Creative capitalism in fact holds all the answers?

Muhammad Yunus, Nobel laureate, explains why creative capitalism in fact holds all the answers to improve human life, as told to B&E’s Neha Sarin

B&E : So are you trying to say that there is really no difference between Creative Capitalism and Corporate Social Responsibility?
MY: What actually is Corporate Social Responsibility?! It is something which started with the idea to help other people; but today, CSR has only become money to gain better public relations. You sponsor a cricket team, a rock concert, that’s CSR. The money goes to the R department and does not go to help poor people. CSR budget is now public relations money.

B&E What kind of government support did you get for your concept of Micro-credit and Grameen Bank? What are the kinds of hurdles you faced to achieve what you had dreamt of?
MY: There were so many hurdles. This was something new. So I knew it was very critical. The kind of words they used irritated me for a while. You had to give money to the poor women. You had to deal with them. You had to address unknown women. These were the hurdles we faced. Then there were legal hurdles too. Initially we did not have any law, which explained how you could lend money without any security. We did not have any banking structure like the government banking system had. When you took some money from the government, it puts some money in the bank @ p.a. interest of 5-6%. As a token of support the government deposits the money. But in our case, we did not even take money from the government. We took it from the borrowers. We take money from them and then lend them to the poor people. That’s how we have always worked, and worked well….

B&E: Aneel Karnani (a Strategic Management professor at Michigan University) criticises the whole idea and system of Micro-credit. He said that giving money to the ladies-folk creates all the problem due to the low level of education and women freedom in these societies. Do critics like him make your job more difficult?
MY: People come with different perceptions. If lending money to poor women make them laugh-at and criticised, let the people laugh. I don’t know what this gentleman sees wrong with it. But he may have some points. I don’t want to argue with that. But it does not convince me that he can lend money to the rich. See, in this world if you want to do something, people will criticise and say something.

B&E: Isn’t it risky that money is lent to poor people?
MY: That is not true at all. In Grameen Bank alone, we have a high rate of return of about 97-99%. Whether we work in India or Bangladesh or Somalia or Costa Rica, it does not matter. High rate of return has impressed people about micro-credit systems.

B&E: For how many people did you actually stand as a guarantor? And what was the amount you lent in total?
MY: There were almost 20,000 borrowers to begin with in the first place. And the total amount that was borrowed amounted to a massive 20 million taka (an average of 1,000 taka per head)!

B&E: With such a huge risk potential, didn’t your strategy backfire or at least weren’t you hesitant to some extent considering the possible negative outcomes?
MY: See, we trust people. It is a continuous system. We do well with them. So they come to us again. Then they stay back with us. We remind them. It is not a one shot thing. So there is no such room of doubt.

B&E: Which was the bank that actually helped you in the end?
MY: The bank is called Janata Bank. It is a government-owned bank and sits in the campus of the University where I teach.

B&E: So what kind of response are you receiving from the market today ?
MY: Yes, we don’t give advertisements in any form of media or newspaper. Yes if you talk about word of mouth we do. We write and people read about it everywhere. Through this, the whole world came to know. Thus the word spreads and naturally so. And about the response, the results are there to prove that it has all been really well accepted. Our model of CSR has done wonders; and that is what real socially responsible capitalistic business should learn to do. No business grows forever without the growth of the entire society and it’s time the global capitalists learn the truth…


Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
 
IIPM : The B-School with a Human Face
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, October 06, 2012

How 2G is India’s First Pro-Poor Scam

The chatterati and the pundits seem to be behaving as if the 2G scam marks the end of the Indian civilization. There is passionate agonizing over how the carpetbaggers of crony capitalism have looted more than Rs 1.7 lakh crore (almost $40 billion) of potential revenue due to the Indian exchequer. There are inevitable and familiar laments about how the money could have been used to build more schools, health care centres et al for poor Indians (the real scam being that enough schools and health care centers for the poor have not been built even 63 years after independence; 54 years of Nehruvian socialism; 39 years of Garibi Hatao and 20 years of economic reforms).

Forgive me for being cynical; but I think the poor of India would actually cheer and welcome 2G style scams because they have actually given something worthwhile to the poor. Look at it this way: till former Minister A. Raja started doling out telecom licenses like prasad in a crowded temple, a handful of telecom operators were making a killing and the really poor could not still afford the tariffs charged by them. Post the monumental 2G scam, telecom tariffs actually dropped to a paisa a second and even lower. More importantly, intense competition forced telecom operators – both old and new – to look beyond saturated urban markets. The fact is: most of the 300 odd million new subscribers since 2008 live in small towns and rural India. For them, the power of mobile connectivity at often Rs.100 a month is literally a dream come true. Also, do not forget how smart entrepreneurs have grabbed this exploding market by importing Chinese handsets. Most of these models are in sync with this new market: they offer long battery (upto 72 hours, even 72 days!) life to people for whom long and unending power cuts are an unending reality.

Ask these poor Indians about the moral, intellectual and existential issues raised by the 2G scam and they will laugh at you. And justifiably. For more than 60 years, they have helplessly witnessed false promise after promise and scam after scam without any material difference to their wretched lives. Now, scam or not, they have got something concrete and worthwhile. As far as they are concerned, the pundits can go on debating to kingdom come.

And don’t underestimate the poor or their ability to figure out what is good for them. The perpetually scam tainted MRNEGA is another example of a pro-poor scam. Everybody knows corrupt politicians, bureaucrats and contractors are still brazenly using NREGA funds to line their pockets. And yet the poor in rural India consider the scheme to be a divine blessing. Their logic? Earlier, they used to get nothing; now they at least get something. Raving and ranting and railing against NREGA corruption is not going to change that.

The fact is: Indira Gandhi was dead right when she categorized corruption as a global phenomenon. You must be living in cuckoo land if you think there is no corruption in countries like Japan, USA, UK et al. The best a society can do is miniminize corruption; it can never be eliminated.


Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
 
IIPM : The B-School with a Human Face
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 10, 2012

UNIVERSITIES: WEIRD RESEARCHES

A number of worthless and frivolous researches are giving the World of science and reason a boorish tinge; we say ban them!

The inane tale continues. The National Institute of Health in the US conducted a study, and spent $500,000 of stimulus money to reveal why men prefer to have sex without condoms! While the objective of the research might still be logical considering the focus on promoting safe sex, the moneys spent to find out the obvious (or is it?) is what is surprising. The University of Florida (ranked 193) spent $325,394 given as stimulus fund, to find how environment affects sex related decisions of women. Thanks to them, apparently we have renewed emancipation of women in our midst.

If it were just about the comic relief, we could have actually chosen not to highlight their achievements. But this is really about how the world’s best universities waste resources and misuse their state-of-art resources in researches that bring in no substantial development to mankind or the planet. There seems to be no clear-cut logic in undertaking research to find out which side a flock of pigeons would turn when faced with a wind draft, or whether good looking people make more money than ugly ones (yes, they do, as revealed by a research by the University of California in 2007).

But then, is it any wonder that such researches do in fact benefit private enterprises? For example, the ugly versus beautiful research could well be a great boost to the cosmetics industry even if a fraction of the population chooses to believe it. The same is apparent in the study conducted in the US last year, which showed that women with bigger breasts were found to be smarter. Lobbies appear to be at work even when contradictory researches keep coming to the fore, like ones that debate on the merits and demerits of tea vs coffee and vice versa.

Sometimes, researches that are meant for serious and genuine issues come up with non-serious and bizarre conclusions. In a scenario where countries, universities and research institution are finding it tough to fund their researches for human development projects and development of drugs that could save lives and uplift lifestyles, it’s criminal that a few universities don’t mind blowing away invaluable capital to take out notably worthless researches. Evidently, one can’t say enough when one implores that such researches should be banned.


Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
 
IIPM : The B-School with a Human Face
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 04, 2012

Singing his way to fame?

Neil Nitin Mukesh is blessed with singing talent, perhaps inherited from his father and grandfather. While Neil has used this talent before by composing and singing a song for Jail, he now is all geared-up to release his very own album of 12 tracks. The actor wishes to use four tracks for his films and the rest for his album. Still struggling to find a foothold as an actor, we hope his other competence paves way for more success.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 03, 2012

FACEBOOK: FUTURE QUESTIONED

While the world debates over when Facebook will go public and what its worth would be, Mark Zuckerberg is worried about a decision he has to make – sell-off his 24% stake & bid adieu to Facebook or alter the very business model by diversifying. What should he choose? by Steven P. Warner

So will Facebook become a meteoric fad? Louis says it already is: “Facebook is already a fad. I don’t think it is going to grow out of that. It lacks credibility.” Pessimism apart, the giant’s credit notes being reduced to scribbled sheets appear quite a possibility. And the mass market has proven to be a fickle group; Facebook cannot overlook this historical truth. Speaking to B&E from San Mateo in California, Jeremiah Owyang, Partner, Altimeter Group says, “Facebook is at risk. Other social networks became complacent, got sold to larger media entities, or failed to invigorate their talent tools and suffered as a result.”

Debate is also on that Facebook could become larger than Google. Speaking to B&E from Chicago, Andrew Lipsman, Senior Director of research agency comScore Inc., sounds optimistic. He says, “Facebook can eventually becoming the largest web property in the world (currently it is #4). But this would still take a few years. To get there, it would need to get traction in some of the larger Internet markets where it still has a limited presence, such as Japan, S. Korea, Russia & Brazil.” But Sturm doubts it. Says he, “It is unlikely that Facebook will become bigger than Google. It is riding the wave of popular infatuation. Things can go wrong for Facebook. What if some hacker found a way to compromise its security? There are many possibilities!” Facebook also has to move away from relying only on online ads. While Facebook is growing, so is Google. Not content with being the dominant search engine, Google continues to attempt to mean more things to more people. Its latest innovation is Google RealTime. In short, cautious, but deliberate diversification will benefit Facebook, as Owyang of Altimeter says, “Facebook will need two strategies to maintain leadership: Innovate & integrate features at all consumer touchpoints, so it’s no longer just a destination strategy.” This typically implies that Facebook has to look beyond social-networking communities.

The opportunities? First comes “analytics”. Zuckerberg has to better realise the power of 500 million samples across 100+ countries. Facebook can serve research agencies and surveyors who are looking at demographic, psychological or other types of market researches. There is presently no clause that disallows “grouped data” to be furnished to third-parties. The situation is thus – Facebook has a mine it can monetise. Strangely, it is not doing so.

Facebook dreams of becoming the new-Google. But it isn’t doing what Google did on day #1 – it has no credible search business (except people), which is what primarily made Google worth $150 billion today, and forced Microsoft to risk a $47 billion bid for an outdated Yahoo! Search capability enhances the value of a web property and multiplies the revenue inflow manifold. How? Google crossed the $10 billion revenue mark when it was seven years old. Facebook is already six and hopes to cross the $1 billion mark only by 2010-end. Facebook is also missing out on the places where netizens spend most of their time – the Inbox. Facebook’s mailing system is outdated, looks rigid & clumpy and is almost impossible to organise. Mails give the most important dimensions to online networking. Most know this; some don’t. Does Zuckerberg?



Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, August 31, 2012

“We’re doing our best to understand India”

He works for a company that makes a billion simply by certifying other companies. Mark Loughead is the COO at Intertek, whose first-half revenue for 2010 rose by 4.9% to £652 million. B&E met Mark up to question him on the future of the certification business by Neha Saraiya

Although Intertek has been operating in India for over a decade across various domains including textiles, food, electrical products, auto sector and chemical industry, it’s only recently – post the global warming brouhaha and renewable energy focus – that manufacturers and even the government in India have realized the benefits of certification and the requirement of syncing their processes with global benchmarks. Intertek has surely done its noteworthy bit – for one, it fast tracked the air-conditioner energy labelling program in India. Development of bio fuel testing standards in the country is being led by Intertek too. B&E met up with Mark Loughead, global COO, Intertek, for an exclusive talk on India, the future of testing and of his firm’s business model:

B&E: Is India up to your standards in terms of certification?
Mark Loughead (ML): The current infrastructure of the country is by and large similar. The issue we face is [transportation and] re-transportation. Our customers want the product quickly after it is designed as in today’s world, time is money. Still, we are doing all possible things to get accustomed to the various conditions in India and to get all the skilled people required by us. Other than that, it is very cost effective to work here. Moreover, with India being touted as the offshoring capital of the world, this gives us an immense opportunity to expand.

B&E: How much importance do you pay to R&D at the corporate as well as at the country level?
ML: It’s extremely important. We always work according to some set standards to get into force. We conduct maximum R&D in our processes stream with an aim to get new technology to help our customers, as it is comparatively difficult to manage them during a business cycle. We take our experts into our research department and help them work independently as this gives us the benefit of a variable cost. We can then test many products and thus, we get high realization rates for our products. Thus, it’s a win-win situation for both. Moreover, when the business cycle gets changed, we get to know the needs of the customers and then we modify accordingly.

B&E: In areas like consumer electronics and automobiles, certification has now become kind of mandatory. But then, there are many industries where certification is not compulsory. How do you develop business in such a situation?
ML: Yes, in areas like consumer electronics and automobiles, certification now plays a pivotal role. But even if we just look at the testing part, only around 10% is compulsory as it is of standard quality and there is no requirement of inspection to be done outside the factories. Still, many companies follow it the other way, as mostly around 80-90% of the products still fall under the non mandatory category. It also translates to a huge untapped market size of almost £200 billion, which is large in itself.

B&E: Which are the basic areas where certification can be implemented?
ML: Traditionally, from the stage of R&D, products would generally be certified at their production stages only. But now, we are working with our customers in a much different way. Right from the product design stage till the delivery stage, we ensure that certification is followed at every required step. This largely stems from the fact that today, our engineers are able to see and monitor the products getting developed from the very early stages. We want to introduce certification from the very early stages not only to satisfy our customers in terms of quality and safety but also to add more value to our product offerings eventually.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, August 30, 2012

“We often work without competition”

In an exclusive with virat bahri, Aricent CEO Sudip Nandy talks about how focus has been one of Aricent’s key strengths and how they will leverage it to enhance value proposition and growth prospects for the future
 It’s been over 4 years since Aricent was set up as a conglomeration of different entities post the acquisition of a majority stake by PE giants KKR and Sequoia Capital. The company has seen an impressive success rate, with revenues at $484 million in FY 2009-10 (from $238 million in FY 2005-06, a CAGR of 19.4%). The company’s business model has several unique hues to it; starting from the exclusive focus on telecom to the multiple client engagement model to the intense focus on design as well as R&D. In this exclusive with B&E, Aricent CEO Sudip Nandy discusses the company’s plans to grow in the telecom space and how the sector is expected to evolve further.

B&E: Tell us about how Aricent evolved as a pure play IT company in the telecom vertical. Do you feel it remains a compelling strategy?
Sudip Nandy (SN): Different parts of Aricent have got different ages, some of the parts are very old. For instance, the larger part of the building where we are sitting was one of the entities called Hughes Software Systems. These were independent companies in the 1980s and 90s. Hughes was listed on the BSE. In 2004, Flextronics acquired Hughes Software Systems in India and made it a part of Flextronics Software Systems in India. They continued buying a few more companies in India. In 2006, Flextronics became a part owner, and a significant investment was brought in by PE KKR and Seqouia Capital. At that point, we became Aricent. It just so happened that the larger entity called Hughes Software Systems and so many of the other entities that got acquired under it, were focussed in some way or the other on the communication eco system. There was a synergy in what was there together. The decision was taken that we should focus on the telecom and communications area since the feeling was that this is going to be a very very high growth area. Three years on, we find that was highly prescient in terms of where we are today. It is not only high growing; it is going to find its way into all parts of life and industries. It’s almost like internet in the mid-1990s. Communication in the next ten years is going to be embedded into everything. We think that with the focus we have, we are able to a) better predict what the future could bring b) invest ahead of the curve and c) when required beat out competition but often work without competition on our own work with clients. Over the last four to five years, we have been growing well and have been able to ride the crest and the trough.

B&E: You have had a long experience at Wipro. What motivated you to make the shift to Aricent?
SN: I have had a more broad experience in technology from 1989 onwards, with a little under 26 years in Wipro. And this is the first change; about an year and a half back I joined Aricent. And at Wipro, Aricent was our competition number 1! And when we talk about Aricent in comparison with other IT companies in India there are some unique aspects; besides the fact that we are sharply focussed. Companies are struggling and are at different levels of readiness in terms of the kind of consulting they have created. For us, around 20% of the revenue comes from situations which is really consulting; where the revenue per employee would be in the $300,000 per employee range; where in normal outsourcing and services business, it would be in the $50,000 per employee range. Second interesting thing is that the model that we have is what we call rightshoring. Around 82% of our people in US and Europe are actually local people. For other companies, the figure is around 20% and the rest are expatriates from India. We are more strategic for customers here whereas in my previous job, I would say we were probably more tactical for the customers. More positive was the sense of what is possible in Aricent. We had an innovation piece that was chugging along and doing very well; and then there was this engineering piece, and there was also a piece which was products and licences. All three had a significant communication component but it was not woven together. If you put the missing piece of strategy, it becomes a very compelling and complete story. Secondly I understood the business very well as we were competing with Aricent. The possibility of creating a new class of company was a motivating factor.

B&E: With respect to your co-creation strategy with clients, what are the different models of revenue you employ and how is it working out?
SN: We do co-creation because the work we are doing is very strategic. Often when services companies work with customers, it’s more of a play on the cost side, whereas our work is more to do with creating new and enhanced revenue streams. Most people go and talk to a CIO and get business, but with a CMO it is a very different discussion and value proposition. Even if it is not licensing of something we have created, we have different models – fixed price model, fixed price + sharing of rewards, capped royalties, et al. We haven’t made it a huge part of our business yet but it could over time become a huge part of our revenue. In situations like cost saving, clients want to share the risk and to keep you happy, they give a bit of a reward. With co-creation, they want to share the reward. We don’t own the IP in these cases; the customer owns it. We have not just people doing delivery work but also project management for the customer and defining their product road map. They have their eyes and ears on the ground to understand what competition is doing and how we can be a step ahead. Our people also work for customers on the strategy front. This is very different from a purely product engagement.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

“I rate the UPA government’s second tenure only a five on ten.”

Sudarshan Mazumdar, Former Director of Brand and Communications, Fortis and Escorts Group, speaks to Steven Philip Warner on why he considers the UPA II regime a half-success...

B&E: How would you rate the first and second tenure of the UPA government?
SM: Considering the overall performance since 2004, I rate the UPA government’s first tenure a 6.5 on 10 and its second tenure only a 5 on 10. The second season for UPA has been marred with failures. Be it the Budgets or the failed implementation (so far) of an issue like GST.

B&E: But aren’t you satisfied with UPA II’s foreign policies?
SM: We have tried to improve our relationships with China, Russia and others. But how beneficial it has been for India? Even today, we have not been able to strike any agreement with China, which still supports the nuclear programme in Pakistan. I think the biggest failure of the UPA has been that even after the Mumbai attacks of 2008, it did not succeed in creating a cohesive pressure on our neighbours to stop them from shipping terrorists. That is blatant. There has to be a coherent policy. You cannot have external parties representing you, which is precisely what has been happening. This has given Pakistan an undue advantage during inter-border talks. All this represents a failure of UPA II.

B&E: And what are your thoughts on inflation in basic food commodities?
SM: Even today, we still have to count on the weather gods to forecast how our economic growth will be. Currently, our agricultural growth is below expectations. Food grain production actually dropped this year by 12%. Then, there is poor food preservation. The lack of government supported logistics creates great wastage. Inflation is just the end result.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, August 27, 2012

Can they unravel this funds mystery?

Leave aside regulatory changes, the Indian mutual fund industry today faces a number of issues which are characterized by lack of investor awareness, low penetration levels, high dependence on corporate sector and spiraling cost of operations. Structural changes in business models are what AMCs now require if they want to sustain profitability by Mona Mehta

When viewed from over 25,000 feet above the ground, the pace of change in Indian asset management industry appears almost miniscule. Year after year, it seems, industry turn out the same old products with growth showing no superlative jump. But that’s only the bird’s eye view. Drill deeper, and a very different picture emerges – one in which a handful of mighty forces are spurring some dramatic changes, in an industry which is perhaps considered dormant till date.

In fact, apart from dramatic stock market performance, the year gone by was the year of reforms for mutual funds (MFs) in India. The key changes included elimination of entry and exit loads on purchase of schemes, the government allowing MFs to be traded on the bourses, et al. While some were in favour of investors, others pampered the industry. Whatever the situation may have been at the start of 2009, most investors definitely seemed relaxed and happy as the year ended. But the question stayed – how will the year 2010 unfold for this beleaguered industry which is still adjusting to the regulatory changes? Will the promise of growth sustain in the near future? Well, it is already halfway through 2010, and the questions still remain unanswered.

Despite clocking growth rates that are amongst the highest in the world, Indian MF industry continues to be a very small market comprising just 0.32% share of the global assets under management (AUM) of over $20 trillion. Though the ratio of AUM to India’s GDP has gradually increased from 6% in 2005 to 11% in 2009, it’s still significantly lower than the ratio in developed countries, where AUM accounts for 20-70% of the GDP. Even a recently released report by PricewaterhouseCoopers (Indian Mutual Fund Industry – Towards 2015) states that although the Indian mutual fund industry has weathered the financial crisis with AUMs posting a year-on-year growth of 47% in FY2009-10, retail participation has witnessed just a marginal increase to 26.6% from 21.3% posted during the previous corresponding period. In fact, the net sales of Equity and Balanced funds in FY2009-10 have been one of the lowest in recent years. Further, if statistics are something to go by, AUM as a percentage of GDP is still less than 5% in India as compared to 70% in the US, 61% in France and 37% in Brazil. This obviously means that low penetration level is a bottleneck in spurring industry growth.

What’s more? Since the crisis of October 2008, the domestic fund market has seen the steepest fall. As per a recent data from the Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI), the industry’s average AUM plunged 15.89%. While UTI MF saw the sharpest fall of 18%, ICICI MF too witnessed a decline of 15.86%. Experts say this was mainly owing to the overall liquidity crisis and outflows due to advance tax and 3G auction payments. Telecom companies sucked over Rs.1 trillion from the system.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, August 23, 2012

A PAPER TRAIL THAT LEADS TO A SURVEY!

POSCO WAS TRULY CAUGHT UNAWARES BY THE QUANTUM OF OPPOSITION FOR THE STEEL PROJECT. RECENT TRENDS PROVIDE HOPE FOR A BREAK IN THE DEADLOCK

Finally, a silver lining has appeared for the gigantic $12 billion POSCO project in India, which has caught the fancy of one and all. Success for the project has proved elusive ever since it was conceptualised due to the impasse over the allotment of land to the company.

The deadlock over the land acquisition for the project of POSCO has been eased too an extent, as POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti (PPSS), the group which has been vehemently opposed to the project, has given assurance to cooperate with the socio-economic survey at the proposed site in Orissa. This development came following the PPSS representative’s meeting with the Orissa’s Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik. However, the road to a peaceful solution still remains ‘under construction’, as PPSS chairman Abhay Sahu asserts that demand for shifting the site is non-negotiable.

The proposed plant site consists of 4,004 acres of land, spanning three gram panchayats (Dhinkia, Nuagaon & Gadakujang) in Jagatsinghpur district of coastal Orissa, which are agriculturally fertile and providing livelihood to the locals. Scores of villagers have been protesting against the project; claiming it will displace them from their homeland and ruin their economy.

Apart from the issue of displacement, the Forest Right Act (FRA) has emerged as a major hurdle in the way of smooth land acquisition. Out of the demarcated 4,004 acres, 2,900 acres is deemed forest land, which need clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests. Though the POSCO project has been able to get a conditional forest clearance, the state government has to settle the rights of the forest dwellers under the FRA and obtain their consent.

The state government had told the environment ministry that there are no tribals in the area and no other traditional forest dwellers have cultivated forest land for the past 75 years, which would have brought them under the ambit of the FRA. But these claims have been challenged by activists. PPSS maintains that the locals are in possession of these forest lands and cannot part with their means of livelihood.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

OUR GOVERNMENTS HAVE COMMITTED MORE TERRORISM ON HUMANITY THAN THE MAOISTS HAVE

In Chattisgarh, more CRPF jawans get killed by mosquito bites than by Maoists! Yes, that’s the ironic piece of research my friend Prasoon dug out for his article in the issue dated 3 May-9 May 2010 of The Sunday Indian! It does tell a big story. Of course, on one hand it tells the pitiable story of our CRPF jawans, as Prasoon pointed out in his article. Thanks to the Maoist attack recently, which left 75 dead, the government suddenly is feeling concerned about the jawans’ lives! However, before this incident, in the last two years over a hundred of them had died of malaria, which was more than the numbers killed on duty. But previously, of course, the government was not concerned about the lives of jawans because malarial deaths obviously don’t happen in a dramatic newsworthy manner.

Is it not ironic that our paramilitary forces die more of curable diseases than of bullets? Well, that’s the crux of India’s problems. That more CRPF jawans are today scared to die of malaria than of Maoist bullets tells just one side of the story. The other side of the story is the story of India’s reality today. The story of how we neglect about 60% of our population and condemn them to die of hunger, curable diseases and mosquito bites. That’s roughly about 650 million Indians who live below the internationally accepted standard of poverty line of $1.25 per day. While India and Indian media celebrate the rise of its billionaires in the Forbes lists, the poor die penniless out of hunger – unknown and unheard!

And unlike the perception that the government wants to create of Maoists as terrorists, the truth is that Maoists are from these very poor families who are marginalised and left to die of hunger. Worldwide, when leaders have kept such huge sections of masses marginalised, there have been revolutions. You ignore human beings and condemn them to die, they will one day believe that picking up arms is a better option than to die without a fight. History is full of heroes who have killed. Those who kill for a cause are celebrated and those who kill without a cause are called murderers. And the cause is also determined by history, not by today’s media and their judgment.

While the government might be hell-bent on calling the Maoists murderers, the fact is that our governments over the years have been full of murderers, not just in terms of the cases against most of our politicians, but in terms of the way they murder their people by depriving them of food, health and employment – the three basic things a government was supposed to be judged by. Our governments kill about 40% of our masses before they reach the age of 45. These people would have gone on to live till 75 had they got access to food and health. Our governments, over the years, have killed millions through their unpatriotic acts of selfish politics – that of enriching themselves and a handful of business houses while allowing massive poverty to exist all around. And that is why in the eyes of many – from Medha Patkar to Maheshwata Devi – Maoists are not terrorists or murderers but those poor people who have taken to arms and kill for a cause. They want food. They want masses to rise out of rampant poverty. They want health and freedom from destitution and freedom from an assured death sentence that the government has given them by not providing them the right to live and a life of dignity. Men thrown to die will always try to fight back. Such men have the support of the masses where they fight.

If the government wants to really end the Maoist problem, it needs to look beyond. It needs to begin by finding its heart first... a heart that beats for the poorest. And then do real good work for the poorest of the poor. Poor have no reason to pick up arms. They need food. They need employment. They need health, education and dignity. Give them these and they would not take to arms. Condemn them to die young, hungry and penniless, and they will take to Maoism. The slogan mongering and name calling utilised by the government against the Maoists would not absolve the government of its terrorism on humanity.


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)